-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 3
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Compare TUV-X Tridiagonal Solver Code with LAPACKE's implementation #97
Conversation
…he metrics being recorded
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The uni tests for the tridiagonal solver seem to contain benchmarking code. I don't think that belongs in the unit tests. I also question if we really want all of the stuff added in tool
. It's good work, but maybe it belongs in a separate repository
formatting changes Co-authored-by: Kyle Shores <[email protected]>
cmake/FindLAPACKE.cmake
Outdated
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
We are fine to include and distribute this if we need to.
To do so, we need to include in our release notes and anytime we mention our licensing that most of tuvx is licensed under Apache 2.0 with copyright attributed to NCAR, except for this specific file.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thanks for figuring it out. That seems fine to me.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thank you for addressing the comments! I commented about the comment style. Could you review the style in the comments in this PR and make adjustments if you need? Thank you!
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thanks for addressing the comments!
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
looks great to me! just a couple minor suggestions
@@ -6,6 +6,7 @@ include(FetchContent) | |||
|
|||
find_package(BLAS) | |||
find_package(LAPACK) | |||
find_package(LAPACKE) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
should this go inside the if (TUVX_ENABLE_BENCHMARK)
block? Is it only needed for the benchmarking tests?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@mattldawson @sjsprecious @K20shores LAPACKE is also used in tests. Since LAPACKE does its own tests when included in CMAKE, is it a good idea to remove the unit tests I wrote for LAPACKE?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think it's fine to include your tests - the find_pacakge()
doesn't need to be in the if (TUVX_ENABLE_BENCHMARK)
block. I just thought if it was only used for the benchmarking, it could be in that block, but it's ok where it as, too (in my opinion).
Co-authored-by: Kyle Shores <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Kyle Shores <[email protected]>
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #97 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 79.21% 79.27% +0.06%
==========================================
Files 133 134 +1
Lines 11193 11284 +91
==========================================
+ Hits 8866 8945 +79
- Misses 2327 2339 +12 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Great work @AdityaDendukuri! Just a few questions/recommendations but otherwise looks good to me!
&& cmake \ | ||
-D TUVX_ENABLE_TESTS=OFF \ | ||
-D TUVX_ENABLE_BENCHMARK=OFF \ | ||
-D TUVX_BUILD_DOCS=ON \ | ||
/tuv-x \ |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Can this be reverted since TUVX_ENABLE_BENCHMARK
is defaulted to OFF?
run: cmake --build build --parallel | ||
run: cmake --build build |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I may have missed this part of the conversation so my apologies in advanced but is --parallel
not possible to use with lapacke
COPY . /tuv-x/ | ||
RUN mkdir /build \ | ||
&& cd /build \ | ||
COPY . /tuv-x | ||
RUN cd /tuv-x \ | ||
&& mkdir build \ | ||
&& cd build \ | ||
&& cmake -D CMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=release \ | ||
-D TUVX_INSTALL_INCLUDE_DIR=/usr/local/include \ | ||
-D TUVX_INSTALL_MOD_DIR=/usr/local/include \ | ||
/tuv-x \ | ||
.. \ | ||
&& make install -j 8 | ||
|
||
WORKDIR /build | ||
WORKDIR /tuv-x/build |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Can these changes be reverted to match the rest of the Dockerfile's or is this change still needed?
Co-authored-by: mwaxmonsky <[email protected]>
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thanks @AdityaDendukuri for working on this PR and addressing all the comments.
Closes #91